A Phase I and Pharmacologic Study of Weekly Gemcitabine in Combination with Infusional 5-fluorodeoxyuridine and Oral Calcium Leucovorin

Purpose: Since preclinical studies have shown more than additive cytotoxicity and DNA damage with the combination of gemcitabine and 5-fluoro-2′-deoxyuridine (FUDR), we studied this combination in a phase I trial. Methods: Gemcitabine alone was given in cycle 1 as a 24-h, 2-h or 1-h i.v. infusion weekly for 3 of 4 weeks; if tolerated, a 24-h i.v. infusion of FUDR was added with oral leucovorin. The cycle was aborted for grade 3 thrombocytopenia, grade 4 neutropenia, and grade 2 or worse nonhematologic toxicity. Results: During cycle 1, six of eight patients who received 150 or 100 mg/m2 over 24 h had dose-limiting neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, fatigue or mucositis. Six of seven patients treated with 1000 mg/m2 over 2 h required a gemcitabine dose reduction for cycle 2 (thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, fatigue). Of 25 assessable patients who received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 1 h, 7 did not complete cycle 1 due to thrombocytopenia (n = 6) or diarrhea (n = 1). Of 42 patients entered, 27 received at least one course of gemcitabine/FUDR (5-19.5 mg/m2 over 24 h) without appreciable toxicity. Due to a shortage of FUDR, the protocol was closed early. Gemcitabine plasma concentrations averaged 0.061 μM (24 h), 16.3 μM (2 h), and 31.9 μM (1 h). In 21 paired bone marrow mononuclear cell samples obtained before treatment and during FUDR infusion, thymidylate synthase ternary complex was only seen during FUDR infusion. Conclusions: Gemcitabine 100-150 mg/m2 over 24 h was poorly tolerated, whereas toxicity was acceptable with 800-1000 mg/m2 over 1 h. Inhibition of the target enzyme was demonstrated at all FUDR doses

Safety and anti-tumor activity of sorafenib (Nexavar) in combination with other anti-cancer agents: a review of clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Sorafenib (Nexavar) is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor that inhibits Raf serine/threonine kinases and receptor tyrosine kinases involved in tumor growth and angiogenesis. Sorafenib has demonstrated preclinical and clinical activity against several tumor types, as a monotherapy and in combination with other anti-cancer agents. METHODS: This review summarizes the safety, pharmacokinetics, and anti-tumor activity of sorafenib combined with other targeted agents or cytotoxics from a series of Phase I/II trials in approximately 600 patients with advanced solid tumors. RESULTS: Sorafenib in combination with other agents was generally well tolerated, and most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. Frequent drug-related toxicities were dermatologic, gastrointestinal, or constitutional. Most trials supported sorafenib 400 mg bid as the recommended dose for combination. Sorafenib generally had little effect on the pharmacokinetics of coadministered agents and vice versa. Preliminary anti-tumor activity was observed; overall disease control rates (partial response plus stable disease) ranged from 33 to 92%. Particularly promising activity was observed in patients with melanoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, and non-small-cell lung cancer receiving sorafenib plus paclitaxel/carboplatin, doxorubicin, and gefitinib, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib demonstrated a good safety profile and encouraging anti-tumor effects when coadministered with other agents in patients with advanced solid tumors.Journal ArticleReviewinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Phase I trial of sorafenib and gemcitabine in advanced solid tumors with an expanded cohort in advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: With its potent inhibitory effects against Raf-1 kinase and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2, sorafenib is a novel oral anticancer agent targeting signal transduction and angiogenic pathways. This study is designed to combine sorafenib and gemcitabine due to their compatibility in preclinical models and nonoverlapping clinical toxicities. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: An initial dose-escalation part of the study enrolled patients with advanced solid tumors, followed by an expanded cohort at the recommended dose for patients with advanced unresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Sorafenib is administered continuously, whereas gemcitabine is given at 1,000 mg/m2 weekly x 7 followed by 1 rest week, then weekly x 3 every 4 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-two patients have been enrolled overall, including 19 in the dose-escalation part and 23 in the extended pancreatic cancer cohort. Demographics were as follows: male-to-female ratio = 26:16; median age = 61 years (range 39-83 years); Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0:1:2 ratio = 16:21:5. The recommended dose of this combination is sorafenib 400 mg twice daily and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events of all causalities were thrombocytopenia (28.6%), lymphopenia (21.4%), lipase elevation (19%), neutropenia (16.7%), and fatigue (14.3%). Antitumor activity was observed in both groups, with 2 (10.5%) confirmed partial responses in ovarian cancer and 12 patients (63.2%) with disease stabilization in the dose-escalation part; 13 patients (56.5%) achieved disease stabilization in the pancreatic cohort. There was no consistent pharmacokinetic drug-to-drug interaction between sorafenib and gemcitabine. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib and gemcitabine are well tolerated in combination; further evaluations in pancreatic and ovarian cancers are warranted.Clinical Trial, Phase IJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

A Phase I and Pharmacologic Study of Weekly Gemcitabine in Combination with Infusional 5-fluorodeoxyuridine and Oral Calcium Leucovorin

Purpose: Since preclinical studies have shown more than additive cytotoxicity and DNA damage with the combination of gemcitabine and 5-fluoro-2′-deoxyuridine (FUDR), we studied this combination in a phase I trial. Methods: Gemcitabine alone was given in cycle 1 as a 24-h, 2-h or 1-h i.v. infusion weekly for 3 of 4 weeks; if tolerated, a 24-h i.v. infusion of FUDR was added with oral leucovorin. The cycle was aborted for grade 3 thrombocytopenia, grade 4 neutropenia, and grade 2 or worse nonhematologic toxicity. Results: During cycle 1, six of eight patients who received 150 or 100 mg/m2 over 24 h had dose-limiting neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, fatigue or mucositis. Six of seven patients treated with 1000 mg/m2 over 2 h required a gemcitabine dose reduction for cycle 2 (thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, fatigue). Of 25 assessable patients who received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 1 h, 7 did not complete cycle 1 due to thrombocytopenia (n = 6) or diarrhea (n = 1). Of 42 patients entered, 27 received at least one course of gemcitabine/FUDR (5-19.5 mg/m2 over 24 h) without appreciable toxicity. Due to a shortage of FUDR, the protocol was closed early. Gemcitabine plasma concentrations averaged 0.061 μM (24 h), 16.3 μM (2 h), and 31.9 μM (1 h). In 21 paired bone marrow mononuclear cell samples obtained before treatment and during FUDR infusion, thymidylate synthase ternary complex was only seen during FUDR infusion. Conclusions: Gemcitabine 100-150 mg/m2 over 24 h was poorly tolerated, whereas toxicity was acceptable with 800-1000 mg/m2 over 1 h. Inhibition of the target enzyme was demonstrated at all FUDR doses